Poll: Poll: UK General Election 2017 - Mk II

Who will you vote for?

  • Total voters
    1,453
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Usher said:
I've never ever voted Tory but Labour has a leader who would be more at home as a country vicar & I just can't imagine him on the world stage. If they win I expect we will see more of their previous offerings such as free laptops for 'poor' families followed by a compulsory extra charge on everyone's internet to pay for it. Cameron scrapped it on his first day of office

Then there was the 'lets make selling a house even more expensive' fiasco with the home information pack which added hundreds of pounds to your selling costs and again scrapped by Cameron.
I have a feeling a lot of brexit remainers have turned to labour because without doubt Corbyn will go for total free movement from the EU so we can expect even more Romanian prostitutes and Gypsies to come by the boatload
Click to expand...
Home information packs were a good idea, badly implemented.

In fact its such a good idea, the Tories are bringing them back and its in their manifesto.

http://www.financialreporter.co.uk/...lan-to-bring-back-home-information-packs.html
 
Basher said:
Someone on £27k would take home 80.1% of their salary.
Someone on £50k would take home 73.6% of their salary.

For comparison, someone on £150k would take home 60.1% of their salary.
Click to expand...

Are you including pension contributions and excluding tax free allowances in those figures?
 
The point about it still "being plenty of money to take home" while being correct seems a little unfair to me.

Brexit is wrecking the economy and will get worse, there isn't enough money for public services, everyone needs to contribute in some way. Pretty much everyone could afford a 1p raise couldnt they?
 
Greebo said:
For the reasons given? They pay as a percentage less than the majority of the working country and their incomes have gone up substantially more than the rest of the country and we need more money and those who are currently paid less cant afford to pay more tax (or it would hurt them a lot more) when their wages are rising less than inflation (due to some stupid idiot deciding to that we should leave the EU)

So yes its basically cause they are the only ones who can atm afford to pay more.
Click to expand...
I've added the ONS Link to show the actual figures. It's not just the 1%.
 
Usher said:
The home information pack which added hundreds of pounds to your selling costs and again scrapped by Cameron
Click to expand...

The scrapping of HIP's was completely stupid. Why would you not want to know what your running costs were going to be before you bought your property? Why would you not want the vendor to pay for the survey?

The fact is, it made selling your house slightly more expensive but it made buying your new home cheaper. In the event of a sale falling through the vendor still had the survey to pass on to the next purchaser. It was scrapped because Camerons chums down at the RICS went mental that their members couldn't charge multiple clients for the same information. I've worked in the office of building surveyors, I know exactly what goes on with regards property valuations and its a gold mine and no wonder it was lobbied against. Its no coincidence that they are called "second gear surveys", they drive past them in second gear.
 
Usher said:
I have a feeling a lot of brexit remainers have turned to labour because without doubt Corbyn will go for total free movement from the EU so we can expect even more Romanian prostitutes and Gypsies to come by the boatload
Click to expand...

The biggest anti-Corbyn posters here just make up total crap.

He has stated, many times, in interviews and in leaders debates and on Question Time that leaving the EU means the end of free movement.
 
Mercenary Keyboard Warrior said:
They took an average wage person (think £27k) and worked out that after the main taxes (Income/NI/VAT/fags/booze etc) they paid 35% in tax
They took a higher earner and Im quite unsure here, but was something like £50k and worked out under the same measure they typically paid 34%
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how meaningful that is - consumption is rather different and if you chose to smoke, drink lots etc.. then that is entirely on you. Also why assume that a high earner consumes at the same rate as a low earner?
 
yep home packs poorly implemented. it makes far more sense for the seller to do all the legal stuff and then it only has to be done once, rather than the buyer and as said if you are selling you are almost certainly buying. the only loosers are the lawyers, who might get paid more than once if teh sale falls through.
 
LatestPollTrends20170604P2-768x450.jpg


https://marriott-stats.com/nigels-blog/uk-general-election-2017-forecast-1-latest-prediction/

I'm going for something similar to the above. There seems a lot of momentum behind Corbyn but I don't think it'll translate to anything other than social media butthurt following the result.
 
ubersonic said:
Nobody is arguing to add barriers to that, everyone is entitled to a free education from the state.

Making rich people pay sales tax on the fees for their children's premium school is just common sense.
Click to expand...

even if it ends up costing the tax paper MORE because leas children would end up going private and more space would be needed in the public system?

I doubt 20% worth of vat is less than the cost of a state grant per pupil....

average cost of private school circa 14k

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/investing/funds/five-ways-to-meet-the-156653-cost-of-private-school/

so 20% vat would be £2,800

schools get between just under 4k up to over 8k per pupil....

http://www.sec-ed.co.uk/news/how-much-per-pupil-funding-will-your-school-get

this is the problem with modern labour and the politics if envy.....it works out worse for everyone when everyone is more 'equal' under a socialist system
 
MeEsH BaKkA said:
Over half of the population is dependant on the state, that means statistically a small percentage are paying for the majority of the country via tax. Why is pushing them to pay more tax a good idea?

Just incase people find that hard to believe or think money grows on trees...
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...fitsonhouseholdincome/financialyearending2015
Click to expand...

So your definition of "small percentage paying" you mean just under half the population. :D

Also direct taxation only accounts for 3/5th of UK revenue. This includes earnings tax, NHS and VAT income.

Direct tax from earnings accounts for around 1/4.
 
Caracus2k said:
even if it ends up costing the tax paper MORE because leas children would end up going private and more space would be needed in the public system?

I doubt 20% worth of vat is less than the cost of a state grant per pupil....

average cost of private school circa 14k

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/investing/funds/five-ways-to-meet-the-156653-cost-of-private-school/

so 20% vat would be £2,800

schools get between just under 4k up to over 8k per pupil....

http://www.sec-ed.co.uk/news/how-much-per-pupil-funding-will-your-school-get

this is the problem with modern labour and the politics if envy.....it works out worse for everyone when everyone is more 'equal' under a socialist system
Click to expand...


As its been pointed out by another poster every private school has a massive waiting list so even if the 20% means some people choose to not send their kids there due to costs, no more children will end up beinf educated in state schools.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom